Debate contribution: Good Relations: Leadership
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 20 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Good Relations: Leadership
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4744584
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have answered the question. As I have said before in the House — I said it when I took up post as First Minister — I am sorry for every lost life, without exception. That is my position. We need to be a bit more sensitive. If Members look at the trauma-informed strategy for victims and survivors that we produced, they will see that it talks about recognising differences and the different perspectives on the past. That is important for healing. I encourage all Members to take that approach instead of trying to point-score politically off one another. Let us be consistent, and let us try to work together to heal the wounds of the past.
117 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.07 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.74).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.14 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.08 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.26 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.07 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.74 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.26 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.90 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.10 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:48 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.